memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Gvsualan/archive
Archive Disambiguations Since 2011 disambiguation pages are for both the natural title and similar titles. You seem to be working on the older policy. - 20:52, January 9, 2018 (UTC) : Explain.--Alan (talk) 20:59, January 9, 2018 (UTC) Memory Alpha talk:Disambiguation#Policy adjustment. It was my understanding that since then we wanted Jason Alexander listed at Alexander (disambiguation), for example. - 21:03, January 9, 2018 (UTC) : That's certainly not my understanding of that, as this works just fine in finding the same information, while Alexander (disambiguation), at preseent, still satisifies "...to resolve the conflict that occurs when articles about two or more different topics have the same natural title or are substantially similar in title". There is no conceivable situation that I see that someone will confuse Jason Alexander and Alexander, so as to link one when they meant the other. --Alan (talk) 21:12, January 9, 2018 (UTC) Fair enough, but I still think Ben went to far, since we don't even list the other Bens anymore. - 21:31, January 9, 2018 (UTC) : You lost me there, so I'll guess? I'm just retooling the less malignant pages in this shit storm of misused, misunderstood and inconsistent system. Yes, I probably could put Ben back together into something more comparable to Bill (which, really, I discovered that slightly sense appealing format after the fact), but at the moment prior, I was really trying to focus on the namespace conflict resolution thing and appeal more towards avoiding misusing/confusing links, not as an alternative t=o the search function that needs to be constantly updated and monitored – maybe there is a universe where this makes sense, but I don't see it here. --Alan (talk) 22:19, January 9, 2018 (UTC) Sorry, my reply was longer before I had to reload the page and lost it. I figured it was better to leave something instead of leave you hanging for a bit. Wikia used to break the search every few years, if not more often, so there have been times when the search was pretty much useless. Searching on mobile still isn't great, depending on a number of factors outside of our control, so there are still some reasons to have lists like Bill, which is a good example IMO. My personal opinion has pretty much been so long as the disambiguation links to the required pages, everything else is just a bonus. If you're trying to impose some order though, that would be a different story. - 22:39, January 9, 2018 (UTC) Carender and N. Myers Back in 2008 you left a message saying that the characters Carender and N. Myers should be switched around. Can you explain why? --NetSpiker (talk) 04:50, January 27, 2018 (UTC) "UDF-RPR" split discussion Hello Alan, would you mind weighing back in on this discussion? Thank you. --| TrekFan Open a channel 22:01, February 3, 2018 (UTC) Banners Hello, could you help us on MA-fr ? Ours topbanners ("real wolrd article", "multiple realities", "mirror universe") are invisibles. I don't understand how to change comon.CSS for to correct that. Thank you. C-IMZADI-4 (talk) 01:24, March 6, 2018 (UTC) : Sorry, that's not my strong suit. Try User:Archduk3. --Alan (talk) 01:25, March 6, 2018 (UTC) ok, thank you, I asked him, but he didn't answer me C-IMZADI-4 (talk) 04:37, March 6, 2018 (UTC) Qo'noS and editing in general It may be just me, but I've always thought that a wiki is a collaborative environment where other contributors see what I'm going for (especially after insanely detailed change explanations in history) and together we arrive at some kind of an improved version that everyone is happy with, as opposed to the current approach of Attempt 1 (um, revert?), Attempt 2 (what is this, revert), Attempt 3 (obviously revert, block article). You can't make a page into holy writ where each sentence must be discussed before being inserted (otherwise, revert). Rather, everyone should be required to understand the problem before reverting and make only the changes that are absolutely necessary, the default assumption being that the editor knows what they're doing (especially after they explain the issue in editing history). -- PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 13:44, March 27, 2018 (UTC) : If there is an "edit war", which is a 'thing' because it is one of the default reasons to lock a page, then it is best to return it to the pre-"edit war" state and allow the involved parties discuss why or why not on the talk page. Had you simply removed the "Kling" reference, added it to the talk page, and explained/discussed why it was removed, that would have been one way to avert how far things have gotten. Had you not re-reverted two previous reverts (not saying the others involved were any better for what they did) and started a discussion on the talk page, that too would have been one way to avert how far things have gotten. Strive for community solutions because . I don't personally care to be involved with the discussion; I am more interested in seeing a discussion hammered out instead. --Alan (talk) 13:54, March 27, 2018 (UTC) The key difference is that I did not actually "re-revert reverts", but instead made three separate attempts at coming up with a version others would be happy with, yet all I saw were three different people treating this sentence as the intro to the Constitution. I've seen this situation here often; it often allows the original writer of the article to have fun with hidden assumptions and incorrect emphasis, while everyone afterwards must take the ultimate pains to discuss each and every holy word before changing it. I'm just saying it's not a sufficiently dynamic approach; rather, anyone should be able to change anything given actual arguments, while unsubstantiated, simple reverts (which is what actually caused the "war") should be forbidden. -- PreviouslyOn24 (talk) 14:04, March 27, 2018 (UTC) : I can't disagree, some are more liberal that other's with the revert button ("see talk page" would have helped in this case), but in the end (and this is a fact that I was not aware of until I read talk:Qo'noS because I don't watch Discovery) those names are in the intro are legit, so perhaps, after all, having all the facts is key before attempting to change something that should decidedly not be changed. --Alan (talk) 14:09, March 27, 2018 (UTC) Communication category It wasn't clear to me what you wanted to do with Category:Communication in regards to reorganizing communications technology, so I pretty much left it as is. I figured when you're not busy with unnamed redirects you can take a look at this. You know, sometime in 2020. - 11:52, April 6, 2018 (UTC) : Thanks. I'll add it to the list. (told ya) --Alan (talk) 11:57, April 6, 2018 (UTC) Merging the unnamed Risians pages Why did you merge those pages? Was it because there's (as of yet) no 23rd century Risians, so there's a gap there? --LauraCC (talk) 17:16, April 6, 2018 (UTC) : Than was a nonfactor, but I won't say it didn't cross my mind. I separated it because I thought it would be easier to organize and create redirect links for, but it was more an experiment than a necessity, because either way it's still manageable. So yeah, I really didn't have any better reason to separate it than I did to re-merge it. --Alan (talk) 17:48, April 6, 2018 (UTC) Acceptable redirect Would it be acceptable to make Sherval Das personnel a redirect to Unnamed Valerians? Or what instead should I do? --LauraCC (talk) 19:29, April 11, 2018 (UTC) Thanks. :) --LauraCC (talk) 19:32, April 11, 2018 (UTC) Also, keep an eye out for the makeup. It might have reappeared on one of those unnamed humanoids pages, for all we know. --LauraCC (talk) 19:34, April 11, 2018 (UTC) Unidentified individual Pics for Tomorrowland Wiki Hi! Could you maybe help me post pics for unidentified individuals on Tomorrowland Wiki, please? (Hobbiton777 (talk) 01:24, April 28, 2018 (UTC)) Not being able to make new articles Recently, I attempted to make a new article. However, when I begin the process, I find myself trapped on the loading screen. I have attempted refresh, cleaning history and cache from my computer, and putting the computer into shut down and restart mode. Each time, I am end up at the same place, waiting for the loading screen to clear. Do you have any ideas on how this can be solved?--Memphis77 (talk) 05:30, May 17, 2018 (UTC) I found a possible solution. If I stop the loading process, I can click on the edit this page option. I am still worried that this is happening as it is not what I have come to expect. What is happening here?--Memphis77 (talk) 05:33, May 17, 2018 (UTC) : There was some glitch going on last night before I gave up and went offline. It wouldn't let me do certain admin functions either. I also had a similar problem last week. Next time you can contact wikia about the bug, directly, here: . --Alan (talk) 16:59, May 17, 2018 (UTC) Great tip. Thanks.--Memphis77 (talk) 19:32, May 17, 2018 (UTC) Why did you delete me? Dear Alan: For what reason have you deleted my user page and my discussion page? And why can't I even see my own edits? I am quite unhappy with that. : Moved to de:Benutzer Diskussion:Gvsualan Userkp (talk) 07:47, August 26, 2018 (UTC) If you don't want my corrections then ban me. Bil Mesa AZ wmunsil@cox.net EoGuy99 (talk) 18:22, September 16, 2018 (UTC) : or just stop being a dumbass. --Alan (talk) 00:11, September 17, 2018 (UTC) Reverts Hey, It seems like you reverted my edits and not . Was that done by mistake? -- Cube-shaped 22:33, September 19, 2018 (UTC)